2nd Level Domains

[David Goldstein]

Hi all,

It seems that .nz and .uk are both keen to introduce registrations at the second level. With .nz it seems almost a certainty and .uk undecided. At least it looks like .uk has a proposal that's more feasible. Yet in .au there's an inward looking, navel gazing opposition to anything new. It's really disappointing the industry, including those of you involved in the aftermarket, are so opposed that is useful.

For more information see:
- http://www.nominet.org.uk/news/press-releases/evolving-uk-domain-name-space
- http://dnc.org.nz/story/kiwis-urged...ificantly-change-new-zealand’s-internet-struc.

It's also great to see both ccTLDs engage in a constructive debate on the issues, whereas in .au it's impossible to even have a debate about all the issues.

David

 

[Data Glasses]

Why would we need it ?

 

[Shane]

I guess I'm one of the few who are in favour of it, provided that the distribution is done right.

My feelings were locked in when travelling around Europe last year and seeing lots of nice short domains like .fr and .it etc being advertised by businesses.

I'd love to knock an extra four characters out of my business domain.

 

[findtim]

Hi all,

whereas in .au it's impossible to even have a debate about all the issues.

David

debate ? there is heaps of debate, it has be mentioned many times on dnt, but the average business person doesn't have a clue to the ramifications of the change.

domainers are concerned about their portfolios, i am also but also concerned about my clients position.

If i was to phone my clients that have hand reg'd their domains years ago and say to them they have to PAY for another domain they would all go BS on me.

the situation is it is only us that know there is even the concideration of this, you want debate then PROMOTE the possiblilty of this occuring on TV and see what happens, not newspaper press releases as NOBODY buys a newspaper these days.

all those small businesses having to pay more is absolutely stupid.

when they change our phone numbers to more digits did we have to go to auction to get them ? NO, they were given to us and it was many years before the old one closed off.

choose the "oldest domain priority" system and sh^t hits the fan, the owner of the .com.au gets the new one at no cost is where i stand

tim

 

[snoopy]

Yet in .au there's an inward looking, navel gazing opposition to anything new. It's really disappointing the industry, including those of you involved in the aftermarket, are so opposed that is useful.

What is the utility in it?

Personally I think it is about raising revenue not providing something that will strengthen the namespace. Lots of countries have made the change and I'm yet to see an example where of one that has ended up with a strong extension. A chunk of websites end up on one, a chunk on the other and chunk use gtlds or alternates. I don't see any value in trying to split the default standard aside from the value to those selling the registrations.

Out of the speculator realm .com.au is a very strong extension (the flip side of that it is a history of being average for domainers because of all the red tape that regulators have put in place). Maybe .de is about the only other one with a similar level of penetration where almost every business feels to need to use it.

How many people an extension run like all the other ones that have made the switch? .in, .cn, .mx etc. These are all lousy extensions with a weak market footing.

Don't worry though one day it will happen for .au, it will be the day AUDA and registrars decide they want more money and feel the need to duplicate the whole thing. Hopefully .au's change will be a long time off.

 

[Rhythm]

I think it looks bad when the rest of the world has moved or is moving to eliminating the 4 keystrokes and Australia is just behind the curve - even compared to some developing economies.

A .au shorter extension can be branded better, said quicker, remembered easier and typed faster. Not to mention looks beautiful.

eg:

dntrade.au

dntrade.com.au

I mean it is just a natural evolution of extensions. The extra .com and .net is just superfluous.

 

[findtim]

I think it looks bad when the rest of the world has moved or is moving to eliminating the 4 keystrokes and Australia is just behind the curve - even compared to some developing economies.

A .au shorter extension can be branded better, said quicker, remembered easier and typed faster. Not to mention looks beautiful.

eg:

dntrade.au

dntrade.com.au

I mean it is just a natural evolution of extensions. The extra .com and .net is just superfluous.

The extra .com and .net is just superfluous

yes but you now enter 2 potential parties/ownerships into the game of ONE, the .com.au is as we all agree ( based on my dnt readings ) is the superior, thus if we move to .au then that becomes the superior, does anyone disagree?

i agree, shortening is a good thing, but the process of the next extension being a MONEY GRAB is what i am disagreeing with, PLUS the way in which "who is entitled to it"

............. i've stopped myself from repeating myself from another thread.

basically heres how i see it goes: the auDA OPENLY broadcast the possibility of creating a .au NOW.

next thing that happens is netfleet, drop, go broke.......... yes ! why on earth do i want to own a dropped domain .com.au that is then going to be given to the person who has owned the .net.au before the expiration of the .com.au ????

OR, are the auDA just going to decide one day that this will happen?

-------------

AND whilst i am at a rant, i am not a member of the auDA, but neither are my 400+ small business clients and WHY should they have to be ? are you all members of the labor party, liberal party, rightforlifeparty ???????? but you vote at each election.

WHY should my clients need to be a member to have a say, BUT also they don't have time to have a say.

i hope that other domainers can come out and post on this thread so the auDA know what the TOTAL feeling is on this matter.

if you think i am wrong then you all know that its cool for me as i always encourage total honesty, pm me if you really want to talk.

bottom line, there is a lot of work to be done right now to prevent a major disaster in a very vibarant business sector called domaining and domian ownership in australia.

a "money grab" could screw the whole thing up, if i was in charge my verdict would be " let england and nz screw it up and then we will think about it"

dare i say look at the EU currency and how england have managed to stay mostly out of the problems.

"history tells the future "

tim

 

[Cooper Mills DomainLawyer]

Direct registrations at .au was an issue referred to the Names Policy Panel in 2010 that I was on along with David Lye, Simon Johnson and David Goldstein.

The Panel in its recommendations did not support direct registrations at .au.

One of the key points was the fact that there was no substantive public support for it.

Tim - you obviously have a view on this (which I know is supported by almost everyone on DNTrade), so you should join auDA (its only $22 for Demand Class) and nominate to be on the next review panel. If you dont want to join you can still make a submission to a policy review next time it is held.

David - I know you support direct registrations, but in fairness the debate was had in the last Panel and there was no support for it. Just like there is little or no support for Windows OS phones

 

[helloworld]

defintly don't need .au

state based would be differnt kettle of fish though. I'd go for a .vic but learning curve for end users would take 10 years

 

[findtim]

defintly don't need .au

state based would be differnt kettle of fish though. I'd go for a .vic but learning curve for end users would take 10 years

.vic : more confusion same issue, just another .melbourne but worse in my opinion.

in 2000 i registered farmcare dca for a bussiness in mullumbimby, there are @ 24 "farm care" abn's listed and it was similar back them, ad in .vic .nsw etc and it all gets very confusing.

not only that but has anyone tried to get a .xxx to rank ? , has anyone seen a .xxx on the top of google let alone the first page ?

tim

 

[snoopy]

.vic : more confusion same issue, just another .melbourne but worse in my opinion.

in 2000 i registered farmcare dca for a bussiness in mullumbimby, there are @ 24 "farm care" abn's listed and it was similar back them, ad in .vic .nsw etc and it all gets very confusing.

not only that but has anyone tried to get a .xxx to rank ? , has anyone seen a .xxx on the top of google let alone the first page ?

tim

Agree, another shocker. It is also very limiting.

 

[FirstPageResults]

Agree with Snoopy.

Can't see it not happening in time, but I hope it's done right.

 

[findtim]

Tim - you obviously have a view on this (which I know is supported by almost everyone on DNTrade), so you should join auDA (its only $22 for Demand Class) and nominate to be on the next review panel.

DONE, may god have mercy on your souls seriously thats a joke

tim

 

[helloworld]

Agree, another shocker. It is also very limiting.

All I said is it would be better than a straight .au

My reasoning for this is purely on local business. I'm not saying there wouldn't be other hurdles,in fact I said that in my original post.

 

[David Goldstein]

Erhan,

To say there is "no substantive public support for" second level registrations is misleading at best. The debate is ill-informed and people are only asked a yes or no question, with no explanation of how a change might be managed. Simply, most people are afraid of change they no nothing about.

A consultation process needs to put options, or at least one, on how the process could be managed. Which is happening in .nz.

And everywhere second level and third level registrations are available with the same rules and pricing, registrants overwhelmingly prefer second level registrations.

And Windows Phones - they're growing. I guess it's a similar thing though, being afraid of change.

To ask why we need the change is not the issue. It's a change registrants will gladly embrace if they have the choice.

David

 

[findtim]

Erhan,

Simply, most people are afraid of change they no nothing about.

David

Simply, who will auDA be telling/asking ? melbourneIT, crazyD, netfleet, domainers, web designers ??

i bet dubbodentist won't know what is happening and thats the problem i see.

would they get to have an opinion? how would they do that? and then would their opinion be taken into consideration?

there are a lot of questions that need to be asked and answers considered before we attempt to go down this path.... if we do at all.

tim

 

[David Goldstein]

Every few years auDA runs a Names Policy Panel. Issues such as this are considered there. Recommendations from the panel go to the board and they decide whether to implement them or not.

I agree a process has to be outlined in detail and the .nz process underway would be a good model.

 

[findtim]

Recommendations from the panel go to the board and they decide whether to implement them or not.

"THEY" , not really an answer to my question or are you saying no public process is conducted?

tim

 

[David Goldstein]

I did answer your question. Every few years auDA holds a Names Policy Panel. Recommendations from this go to the Board for them to decide whether to implement them or not.

And another ccTLD to have recently undergone opening up registrations was .uy. They commenced registrations about a year ago and the transition is coming to a close shortly.

 

[kiml]

I just wanted to add 2c to this thread, sorry it is a few months after the main discussion...

I was on the last names panel, and we did talk to some extent about a potential process for opening the second level if it were to happen. There were a lot of conflicting opinions on this issue.

If you're interested in driving change, make sure you speak up during the public comment periods, and encourage everyone else you know who has an opinion to provide their input.

The panel process gives weight to public submissions and now that there is an online survey, the barrier to participation in the consultation phase is greatly reduced from the days where you had to make a written submission.

Also, the panels are deliberately stacked with participants representing a wide variety of stakeholder groups. Getting the majority of panel members to agree to support a recommendation to the board that is "controversial" or has the potential to bring in even a moderate amount of change, it can be very difficult to achieve.

I think that in the next panel we will come across stakeholders who are slightly more open to change than in the past, because there has been more discussions and changes to TLDs (new gTLDs, other CCTLD operators opening in 2nd level, etc) in the past few years than I've seen in the past decade that I've been working in this industry...